Talk:BreakTheInternet/@comment-3027589-20170227075354/@comment-3575890-20170227185823
I see your point about Moonlight stacked up against La La Land. It's not hard to see which is the stronger film. That said, I strongly disagree with your assertion that La La Land is nothing more than "self-fellatio on Old Hollywood." It was so much more than that in its delivery and message and it did deserve at least one Oscar for its gorgeous cinematography, directing, and editing. It's predominantly a visual film with a decent script and cast, but the other aspects that brought it to life are what has earned it its praise. I admit that if the cinematography, production value, directing and editing hadn't been as masterfully crafted, the script and cast alone would not have carried it. It wouldn't have been anything without the rest of the elements that lent life to the script and cast of characters. A strong screenplay and cast of characters is essentially the backbone of every film, and visual presentation is only one of many aspects of importance, but a film is made memorable when it excels in all the aspects that tie a film together. And only when you tie together the production, directing, editing, artistic theatrics, cinematography, and yes, screenplay and acting to the lesser degree, does La La Land shine. It was not perfect. It fell short in the acting and screenwriting department compared to its competition, but it excelled above average standard in all the other aspects of filmography. That is why it is so successful. "Want to tell a real story about about achieving one's dreams? Write a real plot and cast real, realistic looking actors for it." - The whole point of the film was to capture the essence of Old Hollywood in a modern setting, hence the costume design and Old Hollywood-inspired aesthetic. The film is loaded with nostalgic nods to classic American and French films. The entire film is a tribute to the Golden Age of cinema.That is the charm that it holds in the first place; especially for people that grew up with these films and never see anything like it anymore. Regardless, outside of the glamorous production shots, I felt that Emma and Ryan - despite their natural good looks - looked rather plain and ordinary. As the film got deeper into the story, and the honeymoon phase of the romance came to a close, more and more of the glamor withered away along with the characters' hopes and dreams. What I enjoy most about the film is its many dichotomies: past and present, theater and cinema, fantasy and reality, joy and sadness. It's not grounded in cold hard reality that's bound to invoke much thought beyond, well, good uplifting ones - even though it does touch on some of the more depressing aspects of the show business in a last-minute deconstruction of the standard rules of Hollywood that is underscored by time, patience, and a whole lot of sacrifice - but that's kind of the charm of the film in the first place. Yeah, it carried a hint of fairytalesque flair, but it also integrated elements of raw realism in between the cheerful singing and dancing; it depicted the ups and downs of the show business and the sacrifices that sometimes have to be made to make it in a larger-than-life industry. And even then, so what of the lack of realism? For the same reason I enjoy a good Disney film, I didn't attend this film expecting a cold dose of reality. I went to it to escape it for a while. I enjoyed the vivid colorful landscape, uplifting messages, nostalgic costume design and sets old and new, Old Hollywood romance, theatrics, and starry-eyed dreams. It took me back to a simpler time from when big dreams seemed possible and weren't yet hampered by the conventions of reality. But as time does with all things, reality got in the way of pipe dreams. As I got older, my dreams became more realistic and conducive with probability and practicality. Doesn't mean to this day I do not wish I allowed myself to dream for a little while longer, or a little more insistently. I love that, even if just for a couple of hours, this movie got me to dream like a child again. Especially right now, I felt it provided a much needed proverbial escape from our tragic political landscape. With all of the terrible things that are happening in the world right now, a movie of this tone and purpose came out at just the right time. I don't know about you, but the movie just left me feeling really fuzzy inside with a cocktail of feelings. Nostalgia, joy, exhilaration, inspiration, a newfound burst of confidence. In its beautiful simplicity and uplifting message, I found this film so damn fresh and winsomely unique. It may not have had the impact on me that the raw and poignantly heartbreaking Lion or Hacksaw Ridge had (I haven't seen the others to comment yet), but it did have an impact on me regardless. It made me feel GOOD. And there aren't enough films like that these days. For the good feelings it brought, that alone, I loved it. No, it did not deserve Best Film of the Year for all the reasons you stated, but it in of itself was absolutely a fantastically crafted work of art that nobody will soon forget for its heart, artistic flair, and unique presentation. "Also, funny how everyone blew smoke about these subpar actors getting nominated when not nearly enough attention was given to Dev Patel's nomination, one of the few Asian men to ever secure a spot in these award shows." - Completely agree! Dev's performance in Lion was heartbreaking, raw, and nothing short of captivating. He or Andrew Garfield should have left with that Oscar.